Texas and Ohio Vote

March 4th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Today is D-Day for Hillary Clinton… and d-Day for Barack Obama. This is the third time that Obama can knock her out of the race, he can do so by winning in both Ohio and Texas. Hillary, on the other hand, has to make a comeback; ideally she should win in both states. If one state goes to Hillary, and one state (just) to Obama, Hillary could stay in the race (after all, the difference in delegates will still be insignificant).

Via Buck Naked Politics come some of the latest polls:

Texas

……………….Zogby…..Insider Advantage……..SurveyUSA….Rasmussen……PPP
………………(2/29-3/3)………….(2/27-3/2)……………………(3/1-3/2)……………(3/2)………….(3/1-3/2)

Clinton……44%……………..49%……………………….48%……………..47%…………..50%

Obama.…..47%…………….44%………………………..49%…………….48%…………..44%

Ohio

…………….Zogby…….Quinnipiac…..SurveyUSA….Rasmussen……PPP.….Ohio Poll
……………(2/29-3/3)………(2/27-3/2)…………..(3/1-3/2)……………(3/2)………….(3/1-3/2)……(2/38-3/2)

Clinton45%…………..49%………………54%……………..50%………….51%………51%

Obama47%………….45%……………….44%………………44%………….42%……….42%

Make of it what you will. Obama is the favorite in Texas, but Clinton could win as well; Clinton is the favorite in Ohio (more so than Obama is in Texas), but Obama could win as well.

Meanwhile, even though Barack Obama’s campaign and some journalists (who are visible supporting Obama) have already started calling on Hillary to withdraw from the race if she loses in one of the states that hold their primaries today. Sadly for them, it seems that Democratic voters disagree: they want Hillary to stay in the race, even if she loses in, say, Texas but wins in, say, Ohio. “Two-thirds of Democrats say a victory in either Ohio or Texas would be reason enough for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) to keep her historic bid for the party’s presidential nomination alive, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.”

I agree with Dan Riehl who writes: “Personally, I think Hillary would be foolish to quit if she still has the desire to become President one day. She may never get any closer than she is now and much can happen in the seven weeks before Pennsylvania, where Hillary still has a lead.”

If she loses in both Ohio and Texas, the situation changes. I don’t see how she could stay in the race in such a case. But if she wins in only one state, well, it would make sense for her to stay in it. She may decide to drop out nonetheless in such a scenario, but it won’t be necessary for her to do so me thinks.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Claudia
    March 4th, 2008 at 15:31
    Reply | Quote | #1

    That’s interesting. At least one very prominent democrat appears to disagree.

    If Clinton wins both (which I think she will, barely) she’d be perfectly justified in staying in the race. However if she loses Texas (she’s not losing Ohio) though she certainly could stay in the race, the only real beneficiary from that situation would be John McCain. It’s quite possible that she stays on even if she loses Texas (again, I don’t think she will) but what will probably happen then is simply that Obama wins PA (he’s down by a lot, but the trend has consistently been that wherever he turns his attention, he quickly goes up in polls) and Clinton is forced out then.

  2. Sy
    March 4th, 2008 at 15:47
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Pollster has two new ARG polls for both states with Hillary winning.  The lead in Ohio is 14 points and in Texas 3 points (so a statistically indifferential lead).  However, both of these polls were taken over monday and are more indicative of any gains or losses over NAFTA, new Rezko developments, 3 am phone calls, and any negative press associated with these Monday "surprises".

    Naturally, as a Hillary supporter, I hope they are just catching a trend and the lead will be larger as the full potential of these events have not been realized in the electorate (half a day is not enough).  However, I will still be biting my nails over Texas as that race is close and the rules may produce a popular winner that loses.

  3. kranky kritter
    March 4th, 2008 at 18:08
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Yeah, Hillary COULD stay in if she loses Texas, but the fat lady would be definitely be singing.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                I saw those polls about how folks think Hillary should stay in, basically regardless of today’s outcomes. Unsurprising. I wonder what the results of such polls would be if you separated them into 2 groups, one of which understood the delegate count and likely split of remaining delegates, and one which was clueless on the mechanics.                                                                                                                                                                                                                  It would not surprise me that much if Hillary decides to stay in in the face of the split for rehabilitative purposes. She might stay in while tacitly acknowledging Hillary her chances are slim, but go totally high road. Then she could help the party to continue to hog the airwaves while appearing collegial and conciliatory towards Obama and criticizing the GOP. That would be a different way of "putting the team first"than just dropping out.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.